With new bowling balls being announced, anyone interested in any of them?

[bowl1820]

If all balls are tested by USBC they should compare the perfect scale rating to what they find. If it says it is a 232 and hooks 3 boards ask them to rerate it.

Since the usbc doesn't do those one ball compared to another type of tests/comparison ratings (ie: hook,length,backend) on balls. They wouldn't have anything to do a comparison to the Perfect scale.

I have had one ball rated at 230 and another at 176 both drilled the same both with a matted cover. Hardly any difference.

Thus why many say the perfect scale isn't perfect.

[Aslan]

I don't mind the idea of a database of honor scores per se (Storm, Pyramid and a few others do something like that on their sites... an honor roll of scores thrown with the product) - but what happens if you change balls in the middle of an 800 set? Or are using 2 different balls on your lanes for a 300? Hard to get around variables like that.

Thats why I said (maybe in another thread) that one additional necessary variable would be sales data. Honor scores and titles are available...sales data is not. In order to use honor scores and titles...you'd need sales data. Without it, like Bowl1820 sort of mentioned...it's just a matter of numbers and the company that sells the most balls will always have the most honor scores. You'd have to peg honor scores/titles to sales data and create a number that would be something like "titles/honor scores per ball sold". That would solve many of the problems listed.

Yes, newer balls won't automatically have honor scores...but they'd have similar cores and covers to other balls....manufacturers aren't really developing anything new...just shuffling pieces around...so that could help in their marketing. If Hammer releases a new ball with a Scandal core and a Taboo cover...they could claim that they are; "combining our Taboo cover (a ball that has a 0.31 TiHS/ball sold) with our Scandal core (a ball that has a 0.62 TiHS/ball sold)..."

To factor in using multiple balls for an honor score or title...you'd have to either know when the ball change occurred (unlikely) or simply as how many balls were thrown and give each ball an equal portion. So, if I throw an 800 series to surpass Iceman's accomplishment...and I use all 3 balls in my arsenal...it doesn't really matter when I made the change...the breakdown would be something like this:

Game 1: 300 (DV8 Thug Life)
Game 2: 290 (DV8 Thug Life changed to Ebonite Warning Sign)
Game 3: 300 (Scandal Pearl)

The Thug life would be credited with the 300 game as would the Scandal Pearl. Each of the THREE balls would be credited with 0.33 800-series.

It's true that older balls would have higher numbers...but other than the Hy-Road...I don't know of any mid-level (or above) ball that has remained out for very long without being discontinued. And yes, balls with lower numbers would be passed over...but those balls SHOULD be passed over...because they aren't showing any value to the bowler. And...if a ball has a lower score...the company can simply keep it out a long time (like lets say an Ebonite Cyclone) and the score will slowly increase.

The "downside" to this system is that too many "new' bowlers will try to buy high-performance balls...but, to play devil's advocate, they kinda do that already.

[fordman1]

Since the usbc doesn't do those one ball compared to another type of tests/comparison ratings (ie: hook,length,backend) on balls. They wouldn't have anything to do a comparison to the Perfect scale.




Thus why many say the perfect scale isn't perfect.

Do they put the new balls through any test rather than lab test or do they actually put them in the robot and see what the will do? All that high tech lab stuff isn't a true test. Urethane was bad enough now it is insane.

[bowl1820]

Do they put the new balls through any test rather than lab test or do they actually put them in the robot and see what the will do? All that high tech lab stuff isn't a true test. Urethane was bad enough now it is insane.

If you mean do they drill up all the balls they get and roll them down the lane to see how they hook etc. rate them as far as I know they don't.

Except for when they are doing some type of study like the ball motion study or pin carry study.

They test to see if the balls meet the USBC rules as far as the ball specifications go. (RG, Diff., COF, COR etc.)

You can see some of the ball approval process in the video in this thread:
http://www.bowlingboards.com/threads...Process-video?

[imagonman]

From the Radical minds:

The Tremendous is the newest Reliable line release from Radical Bowling Technologies. This ball uses the Guru Asymmetric core design from the original Guru, paired with the Guru’s coverstock, finished with the same process as the Guru, in the same color as the Guru, and with Guru-colored labels.

So its a Guru w/ a new name. WHY?

[Aslan]

From the Radical minds:

The Tremendous is the newest Reliable line release from Radical Bowling Technologies. This ball uses the Guru Asymmetric core design from the original Guru, paired with the Guru’s coverstock, finished with the same process as the Guru, in the same color as the Guru, and with Guru-colored labels.

So its a Guru w/ a new name. WHY?

Well said...and my a bowlingboards rookie no less!!

You see this quite often...especially as of late.

In some releases, you don't even get that much information. There are Pyramid and 900 Global balls that I believe have similar, if not identical cores due to outsourcing of some of the production. Same thing with smaller brands like AMF.

Other Examples:

Look at Storm's "RAD-X" core. Isn't it quite similar to the Chaotic Core?

Look at Storm/Rotogrip's "Mad Cap Core". Looks a LOT like a similar version of the Halogen core used in numerous Storm releases including the IQ and Hyroad.

900 Global is using it's "Break" core in the Ops series...which is almost the identical core that was in the War Eagle released how many years ago? And their "Profit Core" is almost identical to their "Identity Core".

Look at the Brunswick Edge Low RG Core....looks alot like the Mastermind Core...and even MORE like the Melee core!!

DV8 "Pitbull Low Rg Core"...sure looks a LOT like the DV8 "Grudge Low RG Core".

In defense of the manufacturers...there is only so much they can do with a weight block. Like I said previously, the differential cap of 0.060 limits what they can do with their cores. Motiv tried to push that limit with 0.060 cores...and it led to the most expensive bowling ball recall in known history...and has really hurt their brand, which before the scandal was on the rise. As long as the 0.060 differntial cap is in place by the USBC...the cores can't change much.

"Coverstocks" are the only areas where engineers and chemists can "play around" with new releases...but realize, these coverstocks also have USBC specification limitiations concerning hardness and other variables. And, the coverstocks are, in many ways, rather useless...because there is serious doubt that the coverstocks do anything significant given they can be manipulated using surfacing.

The "reality" is that these new releases...over the past few years...are all round, reactive resin balls...with a weight block...and they can be drilled and surfaced to do whatever you need them to do. None of them are "better" than any others...none of them are significantly different than the others. It's also why you've see the surge in "retro lines" like the Brunswick Rhino and Hammer Black Widow. Bowling ball manufacturers now have to find a new "marketing ploy" to invigorate interest in their line. Some use "harsh language" like the DV8 Thug or Vandal....or the Hammer "Bad ***". Storm has the fragarance schtick. Ebonite and Motiv tried the "patriotism" route with Motiv being made in the US and Ebonite releasing "veteran themed" releases. Rotogrip, Brunswick, and Radical have tried the old Track model of, "fancy engineering", etc...

That's why I like the honor score/title database idea...because the public needs some motivation (besides gimicks) to choose where to spend their money. Right now, the only ball that can claim it is the "best"....is the Storm Hy Road...because it's been the longest running performance ball in the modern age of bowling.

[bowl1820]

From the Radical minds:

The Tremendous is the newest Reliable line release from Radical Bowling Technologies. This ball uses the Guru Asymmetric core design from the original Guru, paired with the Guru’s coverstock, finished with the same process as the Guru, in the same color as the Guru, and with Guru-colored labels.

So its a Guru w/ a new name. WHY?

Yes it's a Guru! They tell you that on the website, they just cloned it, rebranded it and dropped the price point.

[Aslan]

It's also fairly damning on websites like these...that the ball manufacturers send their "sponsored bowlers" to write-up their new releases and how wonderful they are...but those sponsored bowlers most often post like 1-2 times per year and never take part in any other discussions...including discussions like this.

If the ball manufacturers "honestly" had new releases that were worth anything...they'd defend those new releases with something other than some unknown staffer writing 1-2 posts a year about how absolutely awesome the ball is and how essential it is to have in your bag.

[AlexNC]

I can't blame the manufacturers for doing what they can to make money. It would seem that perhaps innovation is a little stagnate at the moment - have to stay within the rules with the current tech they have available. Perhaps that is why they are tapping into nostalgia with all the recent reboots and re-releases. I will probably pick up one of the new Hammer Vibes even the same core/cover is from previous Vibes - the specs just seem like they would match up well for what I need right now.

[Aslan]

...the specs just seem like they would match up well for what I need right now.

Thats why I've been interested (without much success) in setting up some type of selection system that utilizes the specs. If a person can put together an arsenal (and/or progression) using ball specifications, then they can simply choose from every available ball from every manufacturer. If the manufacturers simply re-release balls...it won't really change anything...because only the numbers (specifications) will matter.

But...thus far, it's been a tough project to tackle because the specifications interact with and against each other.